the proletariat as the final class

[misanthroshit]

i always wondered about this whenever i read marxist stuff. what makes the proletariat the final class in society? after the revolution shouldn't another section of society form a class and oppose the proletariat? i mentioned this in another post but i thought i'd make a new topic so that some people could explain this.

[Q]

Socialism works to grow to a classless society, i.e.: a society where everyone has the same position in regard to the means of production. In that sense the proletariat could be called the final class before reaching this classless society.

[Niccolò Rossi]

i always wondered about this whenever i read marxist stuff. what makes the proletariat the final class in society? after the revolution shouldn't another section of society form a class and oppose the proletariat? i mentioned this in another post but i thought i'd make a new topic so that some people could explain this.

Of course another section of society opposes the proletariat under it's dictatorship, that class is the modern bourgeoisie. That is why the proletariat must organise itself as the ruling class (unlike the anarchists like to fantasize, class distinction will still exist after a proletarian revolution and thus will require a proletarian state apparatus to keep this struggle in check).

What makes the proletariat the "final class" is that when they cease power as a class, they abolish the previous mode of appropriation and thus abolish themselves as a class along with all other class distinctions. We understand this from the writings of Marx:


All the preceding classes that got the upper hand sought to fortify their already acquired status by subjecting society at large to their conditions of appropriation. The proletarians cannot become masters of the productive forces of society, except by abolishing their own previous mode of appropriation, and thereby also every other previous mode of appropriation. They have nothing of their own to secure and to fortify; their mission is to destroy all previous securities for, and insurances of, individual property.

All previous historical movements were movements of minorities, or in the interest of minorities. The proletarian movement is the self-conscious, independent movement of the immense majority, in the interest of the immense majority. The proletariat, the lowest stratum of our present society, cannot stir, cannot raise itself up, without the whole superincumbent strata of official society being sprung into the air.

[misanthroshit]

but wouldn't that contradict the dialectical part of marx's theory? from what i understood there can be no end game. everything is evolving and everything carries a contradiction which it conflicts with to make a new synthesis. and doesn't saying that the proletariat is the final class add a sense of idealism to marxism? it's not very materialistic to predict the future. i mean sure you can make educated guesses but it's kind of shaky to base such a huge part of your philosophy on an educated guess isn't it?

maybe i'm just not getting it. thanks for the replies so far.